I find it interesting that in team sports like soccer, rugby, sailing, cricket etc teams playing at home have a major advantage, yet in tennis like at the US open, Aus open, Wimbledon etc, seldom do the home players seem to get any real advantage infact seem to perform very poorly.

Is there any obvious reason for this, is home advantage just a thing that affects team sport? Maybe it's different for the davis cup or whatever but even the doubles players in tennis dont seem to perform that much better at home.

Im talking here about talented players poor records at home grand slams. Murray last year at Wimbledon, Roddick at US open (did okay against Fed in 07 but barely scraped through in 03). Hewitt at Aus open etc.

General Suburbia

04-28-2009, 07:15 AM

You're really only talking about RG, and that's because the French don't have the balls to not choke.

Bilbo

04-28-2009, 07:45 AM

I find it interesting that in team sports like soccer, rugby, sailing, cricket etc teams playing at home have a major advantage, yet in tennis like at the US open, Aus open, Wimbledon etc, seldom do the home players seem to get any real advantage infact seem to perform very poorly.

You've given the answer by yourself.

Kolya

04-28-2009, 08:35 AM

It is because tennis is different to rugby, football etc.

For example Manchester United play at Old Trafford like 50% of their matches and they train there etc. While a tennis player from Australia plays at Rod Laver Arena like a couple of times.

Football etc. actually have a "home" while tennis you don't.

leng jai

04-28-2009, 10:18 AM

The real reason: tennis is a mug sport, run by mugs, supported by mugs, and most importantly, played by mugs.

Merton

04-28-2009, 10:30 AM

Home advandage is not a credible advandage in chess either.

bjurra

04-28-2009, 11:18 AM

But home turf IS an advantage in tennis. Roddick has won the US Open and the reason Murray lost badly last year was a strong opponent combined with fatigue after his 5 setter against Gasquet, not because he couldnt face the British crowd.

Racing post did a survey about two years ago and the average ATP player performed significantly better on home turf than abroad. So much for this thread.

Deivid23

04-28-2009, 11:20 AM

Unless you´re French, playing at home soil is normally a small advantage, at least in motivation

bjurra

04-28-2009, 11:21 AM

It is because tennis is different to rugby, football etc.

For example Manchester United play at Old Trafford like 50% of their matches and they train there etc. While a tennis player from Australia plays at Rod Laver Arena like a couple of times.

Football etc. actually have a "home" while tennis you don't.

A tennis players home country still is "home". Familiar environment, language, food, friends and family, crowd support. I would say most players enjoy playing in their home country a lot, with some exceptions who dont like attention and pressure, such as Mauresmo and Gasquet.

TheBoiledEgg

04-28-2009, 12:06 PM

how do you think Duckboy won his only fluke slam..............

Bazooka

04-28-2009, 12:56 PM

Because the tennis crowd usually doesn't throw to rival players bottles, metal balls or even a pig's head.

oranges

04-28-2009, 01:40 PM

It is in DC :p

Pfloyd

04-28-2009, 01:49 PM

Well for individuals, sometimes the pressure for playing for your country can be counter-productive, whereas in team sports you can rely on your team mates if you are having a bad moment or a bad day.

In the Davis Cup, if you are alone in the court, it does not really matter if your team mates are rooting for you, they can't play in the court with you.

Har-Tru

04-28-2009, 02:08 PM

Because the French are natural cowards, the British suck at tennis and the Aussies too now. Americans have won a handful of USOs.

Henry Chinaski

04-28-2009, 02:17 PM

Unless you´re French, playing at home soil is normally a small advantage, at least in motivation

and in spite of this probably the 2 biggest tournament wins by frenchmen this decade came at home. Tsonga and Grosjean in Paris.

Jimnik

04-28-2009, 02:24 PM

It is an advantage, and not just in Davis Cup.

The most obvious examples: Henman at Wimbledon, Monfils at Roland Garros, Tsonga in Paris, Grosjean at RG and Paris, Roddick at all American tournaments etc...

As for the French, they just suck on clay. Tsonga, Gasquet, Simon and co are solid hard and grass court players. Monfils is the only exception.

Bazooka

04-28-2009, 02:30 PM

Actually I think playing in France is an extra motivation... for the spanish :devil:

Becker and Stich did alright in Germany and this is when they had plenty of events there.

Like anything some are good and some are shit.

philosophicalarf

04-28-2009, 03:23 PM

Plenty home advantage for the French in the indoors tournaments, where several of them are more comfortable (Benneteau, Tsonga, Llodra, PHM etc)

bobbynorwich

04-28-2009, 03:46 PM

Fans often choose their individual favorites based on characteristics other than sharing a nationality. Though an American, I don't like Roddick and would always cheer for Federer, Murray, or Nadal over him. However, if it was Davis Cup, I'd certainly root for the American team regardless of who was playing.

BIGMARAT

04-28-2009, 04:32 PM

because unlike those team sports that you mentioned, cheering is allowed even during point, whereas in tennis, everyone should be quiet, thus home crowd can't do anything to their advantage.

rafa_maniac

04-28-2009, 04:42 PM

because unlike those team sports that you mentioned, cheering is allowed even during point, whereas in tennis, everyone should be quiet, thus home crowd can't do anything to their advantage.

Yes, I think the reduced impact of the crowd in tennis is a big factor.

because unlike those team sports that you mentioned, cheering is allowed even during point, whereas in tennis, everyone should be quiet, thus home crowd can't do anything to their advantage.

You must be watching tennis with your TV on mute.

Besides, there are other factors than the crowd.

Ouragan

04-28-2009, 11:40 PM

and in spite of this probably the 2 biggest tournament wins by frenchmen this decade came at home. Tsonga and Grosjean in Paris.

Glad to see a break from the tireless French bashing. I never got it. Is it because the French are one of the best two nations at tennis nowedays (and Americans players, well, suck donkey's scrotum)?

Har-Tru

04-29-2009, 12:11 AM

Glad to see a break from the tireless French bashing. I never got it. Is it because the French are one of the best two nations at tennis nowedays (and Americans players, well, suck donkey's scrotum)?

I swear it, I don't want to spark a discussion, but... :haha:

2003

01-21-2013, 03:28 AM

It's a huge advantage!! What are you on, crack?

It is a minor advantage, but doesn't seem neally as big as most other sports.

stewietennis

01-21-2013, 04:11 AM

In basketball, the home crowd wave those long balloons around so when an opposing player is at the free throw line, the movement of the balloons are somewhat of a distraction. Also, the noise and chants. In tennis, you can't boo or distract a foreign player or you'll get thrown out. Football fans will sit in stunned silence if an opposing player makes a seemingly impossible goal. Home crowds will still cheer a seemingly impossible shot by a foreign player.

2003

09-11-2013, 12:59 AM

This years US Open first time ever no Americans beyond the 3rd round. Despite US Open having the most unruley crowd of any event.

I think home advantage doesn't exist in tennis at all.

Mountaindewslave

09-11-2013, 04:13 AM

because the home crowd advantage only is in effect in team sports, for a bunch of very obvious reasons

Kowchi

09-11-2013, 06:27 AM

Maybe cuz there are some true tennis fans who root for good shots/exciting play?

:shrug:

Deuce*

09-11-2013, 07:39 AM

Some players will respond positively to playing in their home country, while others will become more nervous and play worse than they usually do.

In Canada last month, both Raonic and Pospisil did well (reaching the Final and the Semi-Final, respectively) - and that was as a rather direct result of the encouragement of the home fans... which is evident because neither of those two players (especially Pospisil) usually make it that far in that level of tournament.

njnetswill

09-11-2013, 07:45 AM

Imagine if crowds were allowed to scream when one guy is serving while silent for their hometown boy. That's how to bring home advanatage to tennis, but it won't happen obviously.

n8

09-11-2013, 08:06 AM

In small events it's a sizable advantage. Look at Hewitt in Adelaide and Sydney, and USA players in their home country events. Even French players seem to win a lot of their local tournaments.

However, in Grand Slams, the press coverage and therefore pressure is much greater. Players feel these expectations. In team sports, this pressure is dispersed over many players and is therefore less of a burden. Yet motivation per a player remains equal.

Ikaros

09-11-2013, 09:04 AM

This years US Open first time ever no Americans beyond the 3rd round. Despite US Open having the most unruley crowd of any event.

I think home advantage doesn't exist in tennis at all.

compare that to their performances at other grand slams this year and sadly, it's the best result.

it is if you are american and play in the states: the umpire will make that go

FormerRafaFan

09-11-2013, 10:38 AM

Well.. Pospisil can only win at home, so I do think home advantage is important in tennis. A lot of players rely on the crowd supporting them and getting them through the match (some probably rely on it too much).

Sombrerero loco

09-11-2013, 10:45 AM

what about players like evans(until us open 2013), goodall and basically all the british players ranked 200-400? they tipically make good results in the uk, shitty results at every other place

2003

09-11-2013, 01:25 PM

Of course it is some advantage but not very much compared to other sports.

Shinoj

09-11-2013, 01:36 PM

Because Tennis is an individualistic game and so it doesnt invoke Nationalistic Fervous as a Game of Football or a team Game Invokes.

chili

09-11-2013, 02:37 PM

Because the crowd is silent when they actually play and when they manifest they're not hostile.

Murray=God

09-11-2013, 03:41 PM

Of course there's an advantage for the home player. It's just not as pronounced in tennis as it is in other sports. You only have to look at a player like Isner and also Murray at Wimbledon to see it does exist. One reason why it isn't as pronounced is because tennis crowds are no where near as hostile as crowds in football say.

JoWilly

09-11-2013, 03:49 PM

Of course there's an advantage for the home player. It's just not as pronounced in tennis as it is in other sports. You only have to look at a player like Isner and also Murray at Wimbledon to see it does exist. One reason why it isn't as pronounced is because tennis crowds are no where near as hostile as crowds in football say.

This. The Wimbledon Crowd this year got a bit annoying at times, and the Davis Cup teams get really unruly. Murray said himself crowd support really helped him a lot. But some players crumble under the pressure in front of home crowds.

But I have been to football matches and some fans are scary as hell :eek:

underspin

09-11-2013, 04:23 PM

But I have been to football matches and some fans are scary as hell :eek:

They police football crowds better in Britain than pretty much anywhere else. Where I live, there are people who aren't aloud within a mile of the ground on matchdays with policeman looking out for them.

I guess home advantage could count in the Davis Cup with picking the surface, but away from that it's just as likely to add too much pressure as anything.

Put it this way, Murray would still be good enough to win slams on grass if it wasn't in Britain, but if Wimbledon was clay he wouldn't in. He would feel at home in the country but not on the surface, and in tennis the surface will be the much more important factor.

RagaZ

09-11-2013, 04:35 PM

Murray would not have won Wimbledon without that crowd

2003

09-12-2013, 10:38 AM

it is if you are american and play in the states: the umpire will make that go

Wimbledon is huge advantage and I beleive that it really helped Murray snatch the title there.

Of course in a way its a disadvantage as well due to media pressure but if you know how to channel the expectation and work the crowds , half the battle is won.

No wonder the low ranked Laura Robson and other juniors do quite well at Wimby

Deuce*

09-12-2013, 10:58 AM

Murray would not have won Wimbledon without that crowd
^ It could just as easily be said that without the pressure of the crowd, Murray would have won Wimbledon sooner than he did...

Before hawk eye, the linesmen/women too..see Roddick Nalbandian 2003 SF..that was the real tennis hoax of our generation.
^ HawkEye/ShotSpot can easily be manipulated to 'lie'.
Not to mention that it's not accurate in the first place...

yuri27

09-12-2013, 01:41 PM

and in spite of this probably the 2 biggest tournament wins by frenchmen this decade came at home. Tsonga and Grosjean in Paris.

Not to mention the last Grand Slam won by a french player was at......Roland Garros!